Tyler Prout , Casey Pelzl , Eric W. Christensen , Neil Binkley , John Schousboe , Diane Krueger
{"title":"2005-2019年医疗保险受益人的双能x射线吸收仪趋势","authors":"Tyler Prout , Casey Pelzl , Eric W. Christensen , Neil Binkley , John Schousboe , Diane Krueger","doi":"10.1016/j.jocd.2023.101456","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><em>Introduction</em>: Bone density measured using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) volume, performance site and interpreters have changed in the US since 2005. The purpose of this report is to provide updated trends in DXA counts, rates, place of service and interpreter specialty for the Medicare fee-for-service population.</p><p><em>Methods</em>: The 100 % Medicare Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary Limited Data Set between 2005–2019 was used. DXA counts and annual rates per 10,000 Medicare beneficiaries were calculated. Annual distributions of scan performance location, provider type and interpreter specialty were described. Place of service trends (significance assigned at <em>p</em><span> < 0.05) of the mean annual share of DXA utilization were identified using linear regression.</span></p><p><em>Results</em>: Annual DXA use per 10,000 beneficiaries peaked in 2008 at 832, declined to 656 in 2015 then increased (<em>p</em><span> < 0.001) by 38 per year to 807 in 2019. From 2005 to 2019 DXA performance in office settings declined from 70.7 % to 47.2 %. Concurrently, outpatient hospital (OH) DXA increased from 28.6 % to 51.7 %. In 2005, 43.5 % of DXAs were interpreted by radiologists. This increased (</span><em>p</em> < 0.001) in the office and OH, averaging 0.3 and 2.0 percentage points per year respectively, reaching 73.5 % in 2019. Interpretation by most non-radiologist specialties declined (<em>p</em> < 0.001).</p><p><em>Conclusions</em>: From 2005–2019, total DXA use among Medicare beneficiaries declined reaching a nadir in 2015 then returned to 2005 levels by 2019. Office DXA declined since 2005 with 51.7 % of all scans now occurring in an OH setting. The proportion of DXAs interpreted by radiologists increased over time, reaching 73.5 % in 2019.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50240,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Densitometry","volume":"27 1","pages":"Article 101456"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry Trends Among US Medicare Beneficiaries: 2005–2019\",\"authors\":\"Tyler Prout , Casey Pelzl , Eric W. Christensen , Neil Binkley , John Schousboe , Diane Krueger\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jocd.2023.101456\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p><em>Introduction</em>: Bone density measured using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) volume, performance site and interpreters have changed in the US since 2005. The purpose of this report is to provide updated trends in DXA counts, rates, place of service and interpreter specialty for the Medicare fee-for-service population.</p><p><em>Methods</em>: The 100 % Medicare Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary Limited Data Set between 2005–2019 was used. DXA counts and annual rates per 10,000 Medicare beneficiaries were calculated. Annual distributions of scan performance location, provider type and interpreter specialty were described. Place of service trends (significance assigned at <em>p</em><span> < 0.05) of the mean annual share of DXA utilization were identified using linear regression.</span></p><p><em>Results</em>: Annual DXA use per 10,000 beneficiaries peaked in 2008 at 832, declined to 656 in 2015 then increased (<em>p</em><span> < 0.001) by 38 per year to 807 in 2019. From 2005 to 2019 DXA performance in office settings declined from 70.7 % to 47.2 %. Concurrently, outpatient hospital (OH) DXA increased from 28.6 % to 51.7 %. In 2005, 43.5 % of DXAs were interpreted by radiologists. This increased (</span><em>p</em> < 0.001) in the office and OH, averaging 0.3 and 2.0 percentage points per year respectively, reaching 73.5 % in 2019. Interpretation by most non-radiologist specialties declined (<em>p</em> < 0.001).</p><p><em>Conclusions</em>: From 2005–2019, total DXA use among Medicare beneficiaries declined reaching a nadir in 2015 then returned to 2005 levels by 2019. Office DXA declined since 2005 with 51.7 % of all scans now occurring in an OH setting. The proportion of DXAs interpreted by radiologists increased over time, reaching 73.5 % in 2019.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50240,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Densitometry\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"Article 101456\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Densitometry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1094695023001063\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Densitometry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1094695023001063","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry Trends Among US Medicare Beneficiaries: 2005–2019
Introduction: Bone density measured using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) volume, performance site and interpreters have changed in the US since 2005. The purpose of this report is to provide updated trends in DXA counts, rates, place of service and interpreter specialty for the Medicare fee-for-service population.
Methods: The 100 % Medicare Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary Limited Data Set between 2005–2019 was used. DXA counts and annual rates per 10,000 Medicare beneficiaries were calculated. Annual distributions of scan performance location, provider type and interpreter specialty were described. Place of service trends (significance assigned at p < 0.05) of the mean annual share of DXA utilization were identified using linear regression.
Results: Annual DXA use per 10,000 beneficiaries peaked in 2008 at 832, declined to 656 in 2015 then increased (p < 0.001) by 38 per year to 807 in 2019. From 2005 to 2019 DXA performance in office settings declined from 70.7 % to 47.2 %. Concurrently, outpatient hospital (OH) DXA increased from 28.6 % to 51.7 %. In 2005, 43.5 % of DXAs were interpreted by radiologists. This increased (p < 0.001) in the office and OH, averaging 0.3 and 2.0 percentage points per year respectively, reaching 73.5 % in 2019. Interpretation by most non-radiologist specialties declined (p < 0.001).
Conclusions: From 2005–2019, total DXA use among Medicare beneficiaries declined reaching a nadir in 2015 then returned to 2005 levels by 2019. Office DXA declined since 2005 with 51.7 % of all scans now occurring in an OH setting. The proportion of DXAs interpreted by radiologists increased over time, reaching 73.5 % in 2019.
期刊介绍:
The Journal is committed to serving ISCD''s mission - the education of heterogenous physician specialties and technologists who are involved in the clinical assessment of skeletal health. The focus of JCD is bone mass measurement, including epidemiology of bone mass, how drugs and diseases alter bone mass, new techniques and quality assurance in bone mass imaging technologies, and bone mass health/economics.
Combining high quality research and review articles with sound, practice-oriented advice, JCD meets the diverse diagnostic and management needs of radiologists, endocrinologists, nephrologists, rheumatologists, gynecologists, family physicians, internists, and technologists whose patients require diagnostic clinical densitometry for therapeutic management.